Hmm, so maybe the rat frees his cagemate to see if perhaps he is disabled and his eyes are available for eating. When he releases him perhaps he is following him around trying to guage if he is disabled in any way that might warrant a nibble. Finding the freed rat to be perfectly aware and troublesome to eat, he gives up. Subsequent attempts to free the cage mate are made on the off chance that this time he really is hurt and is ready to be eaten (can't win if you don't play). If both theories seem to fit equally well, I certainly know which one I'd lean towards presenting to the public.
Manufacturers already define what types of use are covered under warranty. While I don't think they should be allowed to tell you what to do with your hardware I do believe it is reasonable for them to declare what they will cover under warranty. Also, you seem to equate running any component at less than 100% capacity as "sabotage" or "subpar". It is common to use components that are more capable than necessary to meet design requirements but that doesn't mean that driving such components at capacity will be tolerated by the system as a whole. Additionally, such limitations may not be strictly for proper device operation but may also be required to adhere to safety and other legal regulations. For instance, FCC regulations as to which frequencies and transmit power levels are acceptable. Something like a laser pointer may in fact include components that intentionally limit the power of the output to 5mW to ensure the device complies with safety regulations. These requirements and limitations become your homework if you want to treat a device as a collection of parts rather than the system as defined by the manufacturer. The component datasheets and legal regulations are already out there, it isn't the device manufacturers job to reproduce them for you.
Perhaps they thought they'd save money by putting in service requests to decipher the "PC LOAD LETTER" message rather than divine its meaning themselves.
It might even be possible to do that victory sword spin he likes to do so much. I'd have to wonder though if something that big made out of that material wouldn't just bend like a wet noodle.
It isn't enough to just plant their foot against something for it to stick, the orientation and they way they slide the foot is what controls the adhesion. It has something to do with how all the tiny hairs splay out or come together based on how the foot is pulled across the surface. If their feet just stuck to things indiscriminately it wouldn't be a very useful form of locomotion.
If someone says "gigabyte" you still don't know for certain if they mean the SI or the binary nomenclature. Similarly, apart from the binary nomenclature sounding like Del Monte dog snacks, it is esoteric enough in many settings that you still need clarification before you can trust that the person who said it really knew the difference and didn't just copy the notation from somewhere else without really understanding it. Had they laid all this out from the start it would have been great but the old system is so entrenched getting people to abandon it would be like asking people to stop calling expanded polystyrene Styrofoam. I treat both forms as ambiguous and in situations where it matters I'll still ask for the value in bytes before I allocate or access a buffer of that size.
I'd say that Jerry Seinfeld is generally not funny either but his ability to make a widely successful career out of it leads me to believe this is highly subjective.
I'm not heavy into the whole Star Wars fanbase but I'm curious about this argument. What is it about Midi-chlorians that fans dislike as opposed to something they embrace like lightsabers?
I said that mainly in jest, I see the Pandaren as Blizzards version of jumping the shark. To me though, that strategy sounds like saying you are going to eat five hams regardless of if you realize it is a bad idea part way through. In reality though companies plan for what they think is realistic but will cut out early if things don't go to plan. That said, I doubt people will leave WoW in droves even if it does (or has) jump the shark.
Are you arguing that we'd have more privacy if we ignored the vunerability than if the researchers had published it? Are you advocating privacy through obscurity... on Slashdot of all places?
I don't play WoW any more but I always thought Blizzard did a good job with it. There will always be people who don't like the grind, or MMOs in general but for me it was a more enjoyable use of the money than the additional cable channels I'd have spent it on. That said, I've always wondered if the Pandaren would make an appearance, or what the end of WoW would be like and I suspect this expansion will answer both questions lol.
Lisa: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Bart: "Not if you called 'em stench blossoms."
Like it or not, people judge books by their covers whether conciously or not. You can take the sour grapes approach that if they can't get past the name they aren't worth educating but that kind of smug cavalier attitude, so often percieved as being associated with the open source community, only reinforces this prejudice you refer to. What would you say is the most significant factor in the balance between adoption of open vs. proprietary software; technical merit, or comfort with something familiar? You can argue all you want that people _shouldn't_ be biased against trying something new and that the name you call something _shouldn't_ be a factor but you'll only ever be preaching to the choir while driving everyone else away. Even if you have to compromise a bit, isn't it more fun to say to someone "see, I told you you'd like it!"
As a geek who's name is very frequently compared to that of a character from folklore I have to say that the OP's comment does not sound out of line to me, particularly towards a seemingly fun loving individual who starts a technical article with "Avast ye scurvy dogs!" in celebration of Pirate day. Now I can't speak to Mr. Proffitt's personal attitude towards this but I hardly see the pun as a personal attack on him, just a novel irony that demands to be pointed out in keeping with Slashdot traditions.
It would certainly be interesting to know what the response would have been to other short sentences that included the word "died" since that word is so heavily associated with negative emotions. Something where the response of being sad would be unusual like "the poison made all the bad bugs die". It's also hard to tell how much was based on language and how much was based on Washoe reading the caretakers other emotional cues. I don't dispute that this chimp had some amazing abilities that withstood rigorous scientific evaluation but I worry when a disproportionate amount of weight is placed on the biased and emotionally loaded stories like this for which there was no control for.
when nobody acted like jerks and nobody ever said anything mean to anyone nor said or did anything purely for the purpose of inciting anger or violence. Take away annonymity and I suspect you'd see some changes but no overall reduction in internet hostility. Are there really people out there who have never encountered immensely irritating people in person? Jerks also tend to stand out, and the internet intensifies that not via annonymity but by the simple fact that it lets you act on your impulses (near instant communication) and your postings are available worldwide.
Maybe, but odds are we'd shock them for picking the wrong selection to confusing questions like "Abort, Retry, Fail?". These types of vulnerabilities are everyones fault. Realistically we'd need to shock; the engineer for designing a confusing and insecure system, the user for making dumb decisions, and the exploiter for being a jerk.
Great! Now I can work on my brilliant map idea where you redirect tub-girl's 'propulsion gel' so that you can accelerate up the ramp to the goatse exit! If I can get the map done in less than half an hour I might be the first person to post it!
Ever use tools like Mathmatica, Mathcad, or Matlab? Tapping 50 keys with 10 fingertips will get your expression into the editor at which point you can then easily manipulate, modify, plot, add pre-canned expressions or libraries, or save your expression to re-use in more complex expressions later. To each his own, but I'd rather use backspace than an eraser.
Ludicrous, simply ludicrous! I mean do you know how far away the moon is? It's just mad! You know what, you should just go jump in a pit for even suggesting that! Just jump in there, and I'll forget you even said that.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm, so maybe the rat frees his cagemate to see if perhaps he is disabled and his eyes are available for eating. When he releases him perhaps he is following him around trying to guage if he is disabled in any way that might warrant a nibble. Finding the freed rat to be perfectly aware and troublesome to eat, he gives up. Subsequent attempts to free the cage mate are made on the off chance that this time he really is hurt and is ready to be eaten (can't win if you don't play). If both theories seem to fit equally well, I certainly know which one I'd lean towards presenting to the public.
Manufacturers already define what types of use are covered under warranty. While I don't think they should be allowed to tell you what to do with your hardware I do believe it is reasonable for them to declare what they will cover under warranty. Also, you seem to equate running any component at less than 100% capacity as "sabotage" or "subpar". It is common to use components that are more capable than necessary to meet design requirements but that doesn't mean that driving such components at capacity will be tolerated by the system as a whole. Additionally, such limitations may not be strictly for proper device operation but may also be required to adhere to safety and other legal regulations. For instance, FCC regulations as to which frequencies and transmit power levels are acceptable. Something like a laser pointer may in fact include components that intentionally limit the power of the output to 5mW to ensure the device complies with safety regulations. These requirements and limitations become your homework if you want to treat a device as a collection of parts rather than the system as defined by the manufacturer. The component datasheets and legal regulations are already out there, it isn't the device manufacturers job to reproduce them for you.
Perhaps they thought they'd save money by putting in service requests to decipher the "PC LOAD LETTER" message rather than divine its meaning themselves.
It might even be possible to do that victory sword spin he likes to do so much. I'd have to wonder though if something that big made out of that material wouldn't just bend like a wet noodle.
Forget the _why_, does it feel any different than sitting on your hand before 'assaulting' yourself?
As with most statements that start with "be careful" consider substituting with "have a camera ready".
This makes me think that the ultimate dragon hunting weapon would be some sort of launchable spinning cauldron with bolas around the rim.
It isn't enough to just plant their foot against something for it to stick, the orientation and they way they slide the foot is what controls the adhesion. It has something to do with how all the tiny hairs splay out or come together based on how the foot is pulled across the surface. If their feet just stuck to things indiscriminately it wouldn't be a very useful form of locomotion.
If someone says "gigabyte" you still don't know for certain if they mean the SI or the binary nomenclature. Similarly, apart from the binary nomenclature sounding like Del Monte dog snacks, it is esoteric enough in many settings that you still need clarification before you can trust that the person who said it really knew the difference and didn't just copy the notation from somewhere else without really understanding it. Had they laid all this out from the start it would have been great but the old system is so entrenched getting people to abandon it would be like asking people to stop calling expanded polystyrene Styrofoam. I treat both forms as ambiguous and in situations where it matters I'll still ask for the value in bytes before I allocate or access a buffer of that size.
...is what'cha call it!
I'm not too worried. If I screwed up in life and come back as a lower-life form at least mutant super-fish is an option.
I'd say that Jerry Seinfeld is generally not funny either but his ability to make a widely successful career out of it leads me to believe this is highly subjective.
I'm not heavy into the whole Star Wars fanbase but I'm curious about this argument. What is it about Midi-chlorians that fans dislike as opposed to something they embrace like lightsabers?
I said that mainly in jest, I see the Pandaren as Blizzards version of jumping the shark. To me though, that strategy sounds like saying you are going to eat five hams regardless of if you realize it is a bad idea part way through. In reality though companies plan for what they think is realistic but will cut out early if things don't go to plan. That said, I doubt people will leave WoW in droves even if it does (or has) jump the shark.
Are you arguing that we'd have more privacy if we ignored the vunerability than if the researchers had published it? Are you advocating privacy through obscurity... on Slashdot of all places?
I don't play WoW any more but I always thought Blizzard did a good job with it. There will always be people who don't like the grind, or MMOs in general but for me it was a more enjoyable use of the money than the additional cable channels I'd have spent it on. That said, I've always wondered if the Pandaren would make an appearance, or what the end of WoW would be like and I suspect this expansion will answer both questions lol.
Lisa: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Bart: "Not if you called 'em stench blossoms." Like it or not, people judge books by their covers whether conciously or not. You can take the sour grapes approach that if they can't get past the name they aren't worth educating but that kind of smug cavalier attitude, so often percieved as being associated with the open source community, only reinforces this prejudice you refer to. What would you say is the most significant factor in the balance between adoption of open vs. proprietary software; technical merit, or comfort with something familiar? You can argue all you want that people _shouldn't_ be biased against trying something new and that the name you call something _shouldn't_ be a factor but you'll only ever be preaching to the choir while driving everyone else away. Even if you have to compromise a bit, isn't it more fun to say to someone "see, I told you you'd like it!"
As a geek who's name is very frequently compared to that of a character from folklore I have to say that the OP's comment does not sound out of line to me, particularly towards a seemingly fun loving individual who starts a technical article with "Avast ye scurvy dogs!" in celebration of Pirate day. Now I can't speak to Mr. Proffitt's personal attitude towards this but I hardly see the pun as a personal attack on him, just a novel irony that demands to be pointed out in keeping with Slashdot traditions.
It would certainly be interesting to know what the response would have been to other short sentences that included the word "died" since that word is so heavily associated with negative emotions. Something where the response of being sad would be unusual like "the poison made all the bad bugs die". It's also hard to tell how much was based on language and how much was based on Washoe reading the caretakers other emotional cues. I don't dispute that this chimp had some amazing abilities that withstood rigorous scientific evaluation but I worry when a disproportionate amount of weight is placed on the biased and emotionally loaded stories like this for which there was no control for.
when nobody acted like jerks and nobody ever said anything mean to anyone nor said or did anything purely for the purpose of inciting anger or violence. Take away annonymity and I suspect you'd see some changes but no overall reduction in internet hostility. Are there really people out there who have never encountered immensely irritating people in person? Jerks also tend to stand out, and the internet intensifies that not via annonymity but by the simple fact that it lets you act on your impulses (near instant communication) and your postings are available worldwide.
Maybe, but odds are we'd shock them for picking the wrong selection to confusing questions like "Abort, Retry, Fail?". These types of vulnerabilities are everyones fault. Realistically we'd need to shock; the engineer for designing a confusing and insecure system, the user for making dumb decisions, and the exploiter for being a jerk.
This, following the somewhat late realization that Hasbro lets you print your own Monopoly money...
Great! Now I can work on my brilliant map idea where you redirect tub-girl's 'propulsion gel' so that you can accelerate up the ramp to the goatse exit! If I can get the map done in less than half an hour I might be the first person to post it!
Ever use tools like Mathmatica, Mathcad, or Matlab? Tapping 50 keys with 10 fingertips will get your expression into the editor at which point you can then easily manipulate, modify, plot, add pre-canned expressions or libraries, or save your expression to re-use in more complex expressions later. To each his own, but I'd rather use backspace than an eraser.
Ludicrous, simply ludicrous! I mean do you know how far away the moon is? It's just mad! You know what, you should just go jump in a pit for even suggesting that! Just jump in there, and I'll forget you even said that.